Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Key Takeaways
Figures
Introduction
References
FAQs
All Topics
History
Ancient History

Potts 2005 Cyrus the Great and the Kingdom of Anshan

Profile image of D.T. PottsD.T. Potts
visibility

…

description

27 pages

Abstract
sparkles

AI

The research explores the cultural diversity and historical ethnography of pre-Iranian societies in Iran during the early 1st millennium BC. It investigates archaeological evidence, toponymy, and linguistic characteristics, emphasizing that the region was inhabited long before the Iranians arrived. The study highlights significant cultural differentiation through material culture and suggests a complex interplay of languages and cultures in ancient Iran.

Key takeaways
sparkles

AI

  1. Cyrus the Great's lineage is rooted in Anshan, an Elamite cultural area, not exclusively Persian.
  2. The concept of Iranian identity must include Elamite contributions, previously overlooked in scholarship.
  3. Cyrus's ancestors held the title 'king of Anshan,' indicating their governance in a distinct Elamite region.
  4. Elamite influence persisted in administrative practices and material culture during the Achaemenid era.
  5. Elamite cultural diversity suggests a complex socio-political landscape prior to the rise of the Persian empire.
Figures (4)
Tul-e Peytul, ancient Liyan, near modem Bushire on the Persian Gulf.'? The westemmost Elamite texts come from Susa,’* and in spite of the fact that ceramics and other typically Elamite examples of material culture have been excavated at Tepe Farukhabad and Tepe Musiyan in the Deh Luran plain,’ which are even further west, no epigraphic finds have yet been made there to my knowledge. Thus, very crudely, we could delimit the core Elamite cultural zone by circumscribing the area between the Deh Luran plain, Bushire, Marv Dasht and Tul-e Afghani, bearing in mind that the limits of this area will have fluctuated through time. Moreover, we know that this area was identified by more than just one name, but perhaps the two most prominent, supra-regional names here were Elam and Anshan. Although scholars of the late 19th and early 20th century such as de Harlez, Sayce, Halévy and Delattre speculated unsuccessfully on the location of Anshan,'° and Pragek insisted that the A nshan of the Gudea inscriptions and that of the Cyrus Cylinder (see below) were different,’’ the discovery of inscribed bricks at Tal-e Malyan in the early 1970s
Tul-e Peytul, ancient Liyan, near modem Bushire on the Persian Gulf.'? The westemmost Elamite texts come from Susa,’* and in spite of the fact that ceramics and other typically Elamite examples of material culture have been excavated at Tepe Farukhabad and Tepe Musiyan in the Deh Luran plain,’ which are even further west, no epigraphic finds have yet been made there to my knowledge. Thus, very crudely, we could delimit the core Elamite cultural zone by circumscribing the area between the Deh Luran plain, Bushire, Marv Dasht and Tul-e Afghani, bearing in mind that the limits of this area will have fluctuated through time. Moreover, we know that this area was identified by more than just one name, but perhaps the two most prominent, supra-regional names here were Elam and Anshan. Although scholars of the late 19th and early 20th century such as de Harlez, Sayce, Halévy and Delattre speculated unsuccessfully on the location of Anshan,'° and Pragek insisted that the A nshan of the Gudea inscriptions and that of the Cyrus Cylinder (see below) were different,’’ the discovery of inscribed bricks at Tal-e Malyan in the early 1970s
Fig. 2. Persian nobleman at Persepolis wearing the ‘Elamite’ dagger. fortification and treasury texts recovered at Persepolis, reveals an unquestionable Elamite legacy in Old Persian administrative procedure. The very scribes themselves were probably still Elamites, writing in Elamite, yet serving Persian masters. The onomasticon of the texts, on the other hand, shows clearly that the administrative personnel receiving rations and running the show were largely endowed with Persian names, and indeed Manfred Mayrhofer's analysis of the onomastic evidence in the Persepolis fortification texts showed that only about 10 per cent of the c. 2,000 individuals named in the texts bore Elamite names”? Statistics such as these make it moot whether the Achaemenids adopted the duck-headed bow from the Elamites, as Hinz suggested, and the curious dagger with extended guard, known as the “Elamite dagger”, worn by many Persian noblemen (Fig. 2) on the Persepolis reliefs.”
Fig. 2. Persian nobleman at Persepolis wearing the ‘Elamite’ dagger. fortification and treasury texts recovered at Persepolis, reveals an unquestionable Elamite legacy in Old Persian administrative procedure. The very scribes themselves were probably still Elamites, writing in Elamite, yet serving Persian masters. The onomasticon of the texts, on the other hand, shows clearly that the administrative personnel receiving rations and running the show were largely endowed with Persian names, and indeed Manfred Mayrhofer's analysis of the onomastic evidence in the Persepolis fortification texts showed that only about 10 per cent of the c. 2,000 individuals named in the texts bore Elamite names”? Statistics such as these make it moot whether the Achaemenids adopted the duck-headed bow from the Elamites, as Hinz suggested, and the curious dagger with extended guard, known as the “Elamite dagger”, worn by many Persian noblemen (Fig. 2) on the Persepolis reliefs.”
Fig. 3. Bath-tub coffin of Kidin-Hutran, son of Kurlush, from the Neo-Elamite tomb at Arjan. Furthermore, that such smaller polities did in fact exist, and did support local elites, is demonstrated clearly by archaeological and epigraphic evidence. For example, at Kul-e Farah, in northeastern Khuzestan, Elamite inscriptions refer to events such as the suppression of revolts and the capture of rebellious chieftains by Hanni, kutur or governor of Ayapir, who was a subordinate of a ‘king Shutur-Nahhunte, son of Indada” .°* Similarly, the rich burial from Arjan, recently discussed at length by both Stronach and Alvarez-Mon, and attributable to one Kidin-Hutran, son of Kurlush, thanks to inscribed objects found in the tomb (Fig. 3), points to the presence of yet another aristocratic line
Fig. 3. Bath-tub coffin of Kidin-Hutran, son of Kurlush, from the Neo-Elamite tomb at Arjan. Furthermore, that such smaller polities did in fact exist, and did support local elites, is demonstrated clearly by archaeological and epigraphic evidence. For example, at Kul-e Farah, in northeastern Khuzestan, Elamite inscriptions refer to events such as the suppression of revolts and the capture of rebellious chieftains by Hanni, kutur or governor of Ayapir, who was a subordinate of a ‘king Shutur-Nahhunte, son of Indada” .°* Similarly, the rich burial from Arjan, recently discussed at length by both Stronach and Alvarez-Mon, and attributable to one Kidin-Hutran, son of Kurlush, thanks to inscribed objects found in the tomb (Fig. 3), points to the presence of yet another aristocratic line
In the past many scholars°® have suggested that Kurash of Parsumash was the same as the Kurash, king of Anshan, mentioned in the Cyrus Cylinder. Chronologically it is entirely possible for Kurash of Parsumash to have been the grandfather of Cyrus the Great, notwithstanding recent attempts to reject this scenario,°’ but two points compel me now to consider this unlikely, indeed impossible. First, I believe it is clear from Sennacherib’s prism that Parsua or Parsumash was distinct from Anshan, the region that Cyrus’ forefathers are said to have ruled. Second, Kurash is a personal name attested in both Neo- Babylonian sources from Babylon and in late Neo-Elamite texts from Susa,°" and hence by no means rare or unique. For these reasons I would reject the equation of Kurash of Parsumash with Kurash of Anshan.” On the other hand, however, I believe that the well-known seal impressions from Persepolis, found on five of the Persepolis fortification tablets, which bear the legend “Kurash, the Anshanite, son of Shishpish [Teispes]” (Fig. 5), most certainly preserve for us the testimony of a seal which belonged to Cyrus’ grandfather and namesake in the Cyrus Cylinder inscription.©° Much has been written about this piece, and I find myself disagreeing with numerous scholars whom I greatly admire over the interpretation of this important document. Two years ago, for example, T. Cuyler Y oung discussed
In the past many scholars°® have suggested that Kurash of Parsumash was the same as the Kurash, king of Anshan, mentioned in the Cyrus Cylinder. Chronologically it is entirely possible for Kurash of Parsumash to have been the grandfather of Cyrus the Great, notwithstanding recent attempts to reject this scenario,°’ but two points compel me now to consider this unlikely, indeed impossible. First, I believe it is clear from Sennacherib’s prism that Parsua or Parsumash was distinct from Anshan, the region that Cyrus’ forefathers are said to have ruled. Second, Kurash is a personal name attested in both Neo- Babylonian sources from Babylon and in late Neo-Elamite texts from Susa,°" and hence by no means rare or unique. For these reasons I would reject the equation of Kurash of Parsumash with Kurash of Anshan.” On the other hand, however, I believe that the well-known seal impressions from Persepolis, found on five of the Persepolis fortification tablets, which bear the legend “Kurash, the Anshanite, son of Shishpish [Teispes]” (Fig. 5), most certainly preserve for us the testimony of a seal which belonged to Cyrus’ grandfather and namesake in the Cyrus Cylinder inscription.©° Much has been written about this piece, and I find myself disagreeing with numerous scholars whom I greatly admire over the interpretation of this important document. Two years ago, for example, T. Cuyler Y oung discussed

Related papers

Alizadeh, K. (2020). The earliest Persians in Iran: toponyms and Persian ethnicity. DABIR, 7(1), pp. 16-53.
Kiumars Alizadeh

It is the aim of this paper to go into the localization of toponyms, including Parsua, Parsāya, Parsuaš, Paršua, and Parsumaš in Assyrian, Babylonian, Urartian, and Elamite sources.

View PDFchevron_right
Elusive identities in pre-Achaemenid Iran: The Medes and the Median language, in C. Cereti, ed., Iranian identity in the course of history. Proceedings of the Conference held in Rome, 21–24 September 2005, Roma 2010, 289-330
Adriano Rossi
View PDFchevron_right
Petrie, C.A. (2013), Ancient Iran and Its Neighbours: emerging paradigms and future directions, in Petrie (ed.), Ancient Iran and Its Neighbours
Cameron Petrie
View PDFchevron_right
Clément Huart, Ancient Persia and Iranian Civilization [1927]
Persian Studies Cluj-Napoca

London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & co.; New York, Alfred A. Knopf 1927

View PDFchevron_right
Remarks on the History of West Iran in the Context of its Relations with Mesopotamia in the late 3rd and early 2nd Millennium BC (according to the cuneiform sources), in: T.j Daryaee - R. Rollinger (Hg.), Iran and its Histories (CleO 29), Wiesbaden 2021, 99-110.
Hans Neumann

2021

Iran and its Histories. From the Beginnings through the Achaemenid Empire

View PDFchevron_right
Predecessors of the Persian Empire and Its Rise: The Elamite Traditions (forthcoming)
Javier Alvarez-Mon

n Editors: B. Jacobs and J. Rollinger in A Companion to the Achaemenid Persian Empire, by Blackwell Series "Companions to the Ancient World". Oxford (Article delivered in March 2012). Words: 4614., 2017

Abstract: This article seeks to offer a synthesis and new insights on flag-bearing topics illustrating concrete aspects of the Elamite religious and artistic heritage that find compelling parallels in Persian civilization. The likelihood that the genesis and key characteristics of the civilization created by the Persian Empire should be linked in time and space to the older Elamite civilization presents a model of continuity and forces the reckoning of a historical process of acculturation that existed between Elamites and Iranians. Note. This article was delivered to the editors in 2012 (is has not been possible to update; for additional information see Alvarez-Mon 2018 in The Elamite World ).

View PDFchevron_right
review: R. Strootman and M. Versluys, edd., Persianism in Antiquity
Everett L Wheeler

Classical Journal: CJ-Online , 2018

View PDFchevron_right
Iranian and Turanian nations in Achaemenid Iran
Shamsaddin Megalommatis

https://megalommatiscomments.wordpress.com, 2023

Pre-publication of chapter IX of my forthcoming book "Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey – 2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists"; chapters VI, VII, VIII, IX and X form Part Three (Turkey and Iran beyond Politics and Geopolitics: Rejection of the Orientalist, Turcologist and Iranologist Fallacies about Achaemenid History) of the book, which is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters. Chapters VIII and X have already been pre-published. Until now, 19 chapters have been uploaded as partly pre-publication of the present book; this chapter is therefore the 20th (out of 33) to be uploaded. At the end of the text, the entire Table of Contents is made available. Pre-published chapters are marked in blue color, and the present chapter is highlighted in green color. In addition, a list of all the already pre-published chapters (with the related links) is made available at the very end, after the Table of Contents. The book is written for the general readership with the intention to briefly highlight numerous distortions made by the racist, colonial academics of Western Europe and North America only with the help of absurd conceptualization and preposterous contextualization. ----------------------- First published on 22nd August 2023 here: https://megalommatiscomments.wordpress.com/2023/08/22/iranian-and-turanian-nations-in-achaemenid-iran/

View PDFchevron_right
Remarks on the Presence of Iranian Peoples in Europe and Their Asiatic Relations
Marek Jan Olbrycht

2000

Remarks on the Presence of Iranian Peoples in Europe and Their Asiatic Relations, in: J. Pstrusińska/A. T. Fear (eds.), Collectanea Celto-Asiatica Cracoviensia, Kraków 2000, 101-140. The scope of the problems involving the history of steppe Iranian¬speaking peoples in Europe is large and continues to grow as new information becomes available. For this reason this paper is limited to the most important aspects. The very significant role that the Scythians, Sauromatians, and various so-called “Sarmatian” tribes (including the Royal Sarmatians, Iazygs, Aorsi, and Alans) played in the history of Southeastern Europe has commonly been recognized. This is, however, not the case with their role in the history of Cen¬tral and Western Europe. In the 1st millenium B.C. and in the first centuries A.D., the native populations of Southeastern and Central Europe were faced with the expansion and movement of the Central Asian peoples pressing westwards. Some indig¬enous tribes retreated, setting in motion other peoples, others mingled with the newcomers, giving rise to new hybrid cultures. The contribution of Iranian peoples to the cultures of ancient Europe is discernible in many aspects, including Germanic religion, Celtic folk-poetry, and early Slavic civilization. The in¬flux of Iranian steppe peoples in Europe was linked with tribal movements in Central Asia. This was a consistent pattern, for we have evidence of several great migrations in the 1st millenium B.C. and the 1st millenium A.D. Already Herodotus (4.13), living in the 5th century B.C., had observed such processes: “Except the Hyperboreans, all these nations (and first the Arimaspians) ever make war upon their neighbours; the Issedones were pushed from their lands by the Arimaspians, and the Scythians by the Issedones, and the Cimmerians, dwell¬ing by the southern sea, were hard pressed by the Scythians and left their country” Most Iranian tribes entering Europe took possession of the last outpost of the Eurasian steppe in Central Europe: the Hungarian plain. Here, they underwent a number of changes and were transformed, both ethnically (as they mingled with the indigenous substratum) and economically (denomadicization). The interaction of these Iranian groups with the local populations of Europe was largely ignored by our written sources. However, archaeology points to considerable cultural interchange. The movements of many steppe tribes to¬ward Europe introduced new ethnic elements of Asiatic origin into this large area. Iranian groupings of the pre-Scythian period, the Scythians, the Sauromatians, various Sarmatian tribes, the Roxolani, the Aorsi, and the Alans contributed to the development of culture not only in the Ponto-Caspian steppes, but also in other areas as they were driven into many countries at different points in time. The history of Southeastern and Central Europe in the ancient period can be properly understood only within the context of the relations between the sedentary tribes and the Eurasian steppe nomads. Such a relationship is clearly visible in the medieval history of Rus, the Hungarians, the Bulgars, as well as in that of Poland.

View PDFchevron_right
The Invention of Iran: From ‘Iranianness’ to ‘Persianness’
Ahmad Mohammadpour

Asian Studies Review, 2024

The intellectual ‘invention of Iran’ is a potent image that owes its birth to the Orientalist practice of archaeology and historiography from the mid-19th to the latter 20th century: an intellectual enterprise that originated from the myth of Aryan race theory, the hypothesis of Aryan migration to the Indian subcontinent, and the subsequent positioning of Persian ethnie to be the sole author of Iran’s ‘glorious national past’. This Eurocentric narration has given rise to ‘Persianness’ as an ethnoracial form of supremacy akin to the role of Whiteness in Europe and the US. In this article, I not only examine the epistemic foundations of Iranian nationalism but, more importantly, show how the enduring legacy of the Orientalist interpretation of Iran’s past animates the work of contemporary Persian scholars and elites. I argue that the historical construction of Persianness as a privileged identity has essentialised seeing, thinking, knowing, and speaking like a Persian and thereby presented it as a natural order of things. This raciolinguistic invention sustains a habitus that perceives and treats the non-Persian histories and memories only through the lens of Persianness – in which they are by definition less-than.

View PDFchevron_right

References (102)

  1. See Potts 1999: 328.
  2. Mayrhofer 1973: 310.
  3. See Potts 1999: 342ff.
  4. Cf. Dandamaev 1993a: 517. 26. Smith 1924.
  5. Dandamaev 1993b: 521.
  6. Berger 1975: 197, l. 21.
  7. Gadd, Legrain and Smith 1928: no. 194, ll. 1-3.
  8. Grayson 1975: 106, ii 1; cylinder text cited from Beaulieu 1989, where it appears as text 15. The assertion, "In a Babylonian text Cyrus II gives his line of descent from Achaemenes, the eponymous founder of the family, as Teispes, Cyrus, and finally Cambyses" (Hansman 1975: 289), is utterly baseless. Hansman also draws the equally unfounded conclusion that Parsumash = Anshan, since he equates Kurash of Parsumash with Kurash, king of Anshan (ibid.: 290).
  9. Nöldeke 1887: 15.
  10. I have this reference via Briant 1984 but have only been able myself to consult the 1896 French translation of this work, which appeared as Nöldeke T. 1896. Études historiques sur la Perse ancienne. Paris: Ledroux. Cf. Weissbach 1924: col. 188, "Die Dynastie des K. war von einem elamischen Lande oder Grenzlande (Anšan) ausgegangen", without commenting on the ethnicity of Cyrus and his forebears.
  11. Prášek 1912: 6. He also suggested, apropos the Anshan of the Achaemenids, "wir werden nicht fehlgehen, wenn wir mit ihm den gräcizierten Flusnamen Andanis und den landschaftlichen Namen Assan arabischer Geographen in Zusammenhang bringen" (ibid.).
  12. Wiesehöfer 1999.
  13. Hansman 1975: 294.
  14. Dandamaev 1993a: 516.
  15. De Miroschedji 1985: 298-9.
  16. Waters 1996: 18.
  17. Potts 1999: Table 5.2.
  18. Ibid.: 145.
  19. Ibid.: 142-5.
  20. Ibid.: Table 5.5.
  21. Thus Vallat, see Potts 1999: 149.
  22. Potts 1999: Table 7.7.
  23. Ibid.: 211.
  24. Ibid.: 268.
  25. Ibid.: 272; Luckenbill 1924: 88.
  26. See most recently Rollinger 1999, Zadok 2002: 29-33.
  27. Cf. Stronach 2003: 251.
  28. Cf. Stronach 1997a: 38; contra Henkelman 2003b: 193. Stronach has noted: "it is of special interest that so much is made, through clearly conscious repetition, of the distinctive Anshanite titulary of Cyrus' own blood line. While the argument is sometimes advanced that Cyrus only introduced the toponym 'Anshan' instead of 'Parsa' in his Mesopotamian inscriptions in order to give his Persian homeland a name that would have been more readily recognisable to a Mesopotamian audience, Bibliography
  29. Alvarez-Mon, J. (2004). "Imago Mundi: Cosmological and ideological aspects of the Arjan bowl", IrAnt 39: 203-38.
  30. Amiet, P. (1973). "La glyptique de la fin de l'Elam", Arts Asiatiques 28: 3-45.
  31. Andreas, F.C. (1904). "Ueber einige Fragen der aeltesten persischen Geschichte", Verhandlungen des XIII. Internationalen Orientalisten- Kongresses, Hamburg, September 1902. Leiden: Brill: 93-9.
  32. Beaulieu, P.-A. (1989). The Reign of Nabonidus, King of Babylon, 556-539 B.C. New Haven: Yale Near Eastern Researches 10.
  33. Bellwood, P. (2001). "Early agriculturalist population diasporas? Farming, languages, and genes", Annual Review of Anthropology 30: 181-207.
  34. Berger, P.-R. (1975). "Der Kyros-Zylinder mit dem Zusatzfragment BIN II Nr. 32 und die akkadischen Personennamen im Danielbuch", ZA 64: 192-234.
  35. Boas, F. (1940). Race, Language and Culture. New York: Macmillan.
  36. Bollweg, J. (1988). "Protoachämenidische Siegelbilder", AMI 21: 53-61.
  37. Briant, P. (1984). "La Perse avant l'empire (un état de la question)", IrAnt 19: 71-118.
  38. -(1996). Histoire de l'empire perse. Paris: Fayard.
  39. Carter, E. (1981). "A summary of the Shimashki, sukkalmahhu, and transitional phases at Tepe Farukhabad", in H.T. Wright (ed.), An Early Town on the Deh Luran Plain: Excavations at Tepe Farukhabad. Ann Arbor: Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, no. 13: 218-23.
  40. Dandamaev, M. (1993a). "Cyrus iii. Cyrus II the Great", EncIr 6: 516-21.
  41. -(1993b). "Cyrus iv. The Cyrus cylinder", EncIr 6: 521-22.
  42. Delattre, A. (1883a). "Encore un mot sur la prétendue origine susienne de Cyrus", Le Muséon 2: 53.
  43. -(1883b). "Cyrus d'après une nouvelle méthode historique", Le Muséon 2: 442-59.
  44. Diamond, J., and Bellwood, P. (2003). "Farmers and their languages: The first expansions", Science 300: 597-603.
  45. Dickson, H.R.P. (1956). Kuwait and her Neighbours. London: Allen & Unwin Dusinberre, E.R.M. (2002). "An excavated ivory from Kerkenes Dag, Turkey: Transcultural fluidities, significations of collective identity, and the problem of Median art", Ars Orientalis 32: 17-54.
  46. Forbiger, A. (1844). Handbuch der alten Geographie aus den Quellen bearbeitet, i-ii. Leipzig: Mayer & Wigand.
  47. Frye, R.N. (1962). The Heritage of Persia. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
  48. Gadd, C.J., Legrain, L., and Smith, S. (1928). Royal Inscriptions. London: UET 1.
  49. Garrison, M.B., and Root, M.C. (1996). Persepolis Seal Studies: An introduction with provisional concordances of seal numbers and associated documents on Fortification Tablets 1-2087. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten [= Achaemenid History 9].
  50. Grayson, A.K. (1975). Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles. Locus Valley: TCS.
  51. Grillot, F. and Vallat, F. (1978). "Le verbe élamite 'pi(š)ši' ", Cahiers de la DAFI 8: 81-4.
  52. Halévy, J. (1883). "Cyrus et l'origine des Achéménides", Le Muséon 2: 43-52, 247-60.
  53. Hansman, J. (1975). "An Achaemenian stronghold", in Hommages et Opera Minora III. Monumentum H.S. Nyberg III [= AIr 6]. Leiden: Brill.
  54. Harlez, C. de (1882). "Même sujet" [rejoinder to Sayce 1882], Le Muséon 1: 557-70.
  55. -(1883). "Conclusion", Le Muséon 2: 261-8.
  56. Harmatta, J. (1971a). "The rise of the Old Persian Empire: Cyrus the Great", AAASH 19: 3-15.
  57. -(1971b). "The literary patterns of the Babylonian edict of Cyrus", AAASH 19: 217-31.
  58. Henkelman, W. (2003a). "Review of M. Waters, A Survey of Neo-Elamite History", BiOr 60: 251-63.
  59. -(2003b). "Persians, Medes and Elamites: Acculturation in the Neo-Elamite period", in G.B. Lanfranchi, M. Roaf and R. Rollinger (eds), Continuity of Empire (?): Assyria, Media, Persia. Padua: History of the Ancient Near East/Monographs 5: 181-231.
  60. Hoffmann-Kutschke, A. (1907). "Iranisches bei den Griechen", Philologus 20: 173-91.
  61. Hüsing, G. (1908). "Die Namen der Könige von Ančan", OLZ 11: 318-22.
  62. Kellens, J. (2002). "L'idéologie religieuse des inscriptions achéménides", JA 290: 417-64.
  63. König, F.W. (1965). Die elamischen Königsinschriften. Graz: AfO Beiheft 16. Lamberg-Karlovsky, C.C. (2002). "Archaeology and language: The Indo- Iranians", Current Anthropology 43: 63-88.
  64. Luckenbill, D.D. (1924). The Annals of Sennacherib. Chicago: OIP 2.
  65. Marquart, J. (1891-3). Die Assyriaka des Ktesias. Göttingen: Philologus Supplementband 6.
  66. Mayrhofer, M. (1973). Onomastica Persepolitana: Das altiranische Namengut der Persepolis-Täfelchen. Vienna: Sitzungsberichte der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Kl. 286.
  67. Miroschedji, P. de (1985). "La fin du royaume de l'Anšan et de Suse et la naissance de l'empire perse", ZA 75: 265-306.
  68. Nöldeke, T. (1887). Aufsätze zur persischen Geschichte. Leipzig.
  69. Parpola, A. (2002). "Pre-Proto-Iranians of Afghanistan as initiators of Šāktā tantrism: On the Scythian/Saka affiliation of the Dāsas, Nuristanis and Magadhans", IrAnt 37: 233-324.
  70. Potts, D.T. (1999). The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. Cambridge: CUP.
  71. Prášek, J. (1912). Kyros der Große. Leipzig: Hinrichs.
  72. Reiner, E. (1973). "The location of Anšan", RA 67: 57-62.
  73. Rollinger, R. (1998). "Der Stammbaum des achaimenidischen Königshauses oder die Frage der Legitimität der Herrschaft des Dareios", AMIT 30: 155- 209. -(1999). "Zur Lokalisation von Parsu(m)a(š) in der Fars und zu einigen Fragen der frühen persischen Geschichte", ZA 89: 115-39.
  74. Roustaei, K. and Potts, D.T. (20040. "The ICAR-University of Sydney Joint Archaeological Expedition in Mamasani, Fars Province: A preliminary report on the fieldwork", Archaeological Reports 2: 9-26 (in Farsi).
  75. Sayce, A.H. (1882). "Cyrus était-il roi de Perse ou de Susiane?", Le Muséon 1: 548-56.
  76. -(1886). "La situation géographique d'Anzan", Le Muséon 5: 501-505.
  77. Shahbazi, S. (1993). "Cyrus ii. Cyrus I", EncIr 6: 516.
  78. Skalmowski, W. (1993). "Two Old Persian names", OLP 24: 73-7.
  79. Smith, S. (1924). Babylonian Historical Texts Relating to the Capture and Downfall of Babylon. London: Methuen.
  80. Spiegel, F. (1871-8). Erânische Altertumskunde, i-iii. Amsterdam: Oriental Press (1971 reprint).
  81. Stolper, M.W. (1984). Texts from Tall-i Malyan, I. Elamite administrative texts (1972-1974). Philadelphia: Occasional Publications of the Babylonian Fund 6.
  82. Stronach, D. (1990). "On the genesis of the Old Persian cuneiform script", in F. Vallat (ed.), Mélanges Jean Perrot. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les civilisations: 195-203.
  83. -(1997a). "Anshan and Parsa: Early Achaemenid history, art and architecture on the Iranian Plateau", in J. Curtis (ed.), Mesopotamia and Iran in the Persian Period: Conquest and Imperialism 539-331 B.C. London: The British Museum: 35-53.
  84. -(1997b). "On the interpretation of the Pasargadae inscriptions", in B. Magnusson, S. Renzetti, P. Vian and S.J. Voicu (eds), Ultra terminum vagari: Scritti in onore di Carl Nylander. Rome: Edizioni Quasar: 323-9.
  85. -(1998). "On the date of the Oxus gold scabbard and other Achaemenid matters", BAI 12: 231-48.
  86. -(2000). "Of Cyrus, Darius and Alexander: A new look at the 'epitaphs' of Cyrus the Great", in R. Dittmann, B. Hrouda, U. Löw, P. Matthiae, R. Mayer-Opificius and S. Thürwächter (eds), Variatio delectat: Iran und der Westen, Gedenkschrift für Peter Calmeyer. Münster: AOAT 272: 681-702.
  87. -(2003). "The tomb at Arjan and the history of southwestern Iran in the early sixth century BCE", in N.F. Miller and K. Abdi (eds), Yeki bud, yeki nabud: Essays on the Archaeology of Iran in Honor of William M. Sumner. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph 48: 249-59.
  88. Tavernier, J. (2002). Iranica in de Achaemenidische Periode (ca. 550-330 v. Chr.): Taalkundige studie van Oud-Iraanse eigennamen en leenwoorden, die geattesteerd zijn in niet-Iraanse teksten, 3 vols. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
  89. Vallat, F. (1980). Suse et l'Elam. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les grandes civilisations.
  90. -(1993). Les noms géographiques des sources suso-élamites. Wiesbaden: Répertoire Géographique des Textes Cunéiformes 11.
  91. Voigt, M. and Dyson, R.H., Jr (1992). "The chronology of Iran, ca. 8000-2000 B.C.", in R.W. Ehrich (ed.), Chronologies in Old World Archaeology (3rd edn). Chicago/London: University of Chicago: 122-78.
  92. Waters, M. (1996). "Darius and the Achaemenid line", The Ancient History Bulletin 10: 11-18.
  93. -(2000). A Survey of Neo-Elamite History. Helsinki: State Archives of Assyria Studies 12.
  94. -(2004). "Cyrus and the Achaemenids", Iran 42: 91-102.
  95. Weidner, E. (1931-2). "Die älteste Nachricht über das persische Königshaus: Kyros I. ein Zeitgenosse Assurbânaplis", AfO 7: 1-7.
  96. Weissbach, F.H. (1924). "Kyros 4", RE 23: col. 188.
  97. Wiesehöfer, J. (1999). "Fars ii. History in the pre-Islamic period", EncIr 9: 333-7. -(2002). "Gebete für die 'Urahnen' oder: Wann und wie verschwanden Kyros und Dareios aus der historischen Tradition Irans?", Electrum 6: 111-17.
  98. Yarshater, E. (1983). "Iranian national history", CHIr 3/1: 359-477.
  99. Young, T.C., Jr (2003). "Parsua, Parsa, and potsherds", in N.F. Miller and K. Abdi (eds), Yeki bud, yeki nabud: Essays on the Archaeology of Iran in Honor of William M. Sumner. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Monograph 48: 243-8.
  100. Zadok, R. (1976). "On the connections between Iran and Babylonia in the sixth century B.C.", Iran 14: 61-78.
  101. -(1991). "Elamite onomastics", SEL 8: 225-37.
  102. -(2002). The Ethno-linguistic Character of Northwestern Iran and Kurdistan in the Neo-Assyrian Period. Jaffa: Archaeological Center Publications.

FAQs

sparkles

AI

What explains the absence of Elamite identity in traditional studies of Iranian culture?add

The study finds that Elamite contributions to Iranian identity have been largely overlooked, focusing instead on Indo-European perspectives since the 19th century.

How did archaeological evidence challenge assumptions about Iranian linguistic homogeneity?add

Archaeological findings reveal significant cultural diversity in Iran, with no uniformity evident in Neolithic to Bronze Age assemblages.

What role does the toponymy of ancient Iran play in understanding cultural diversity?add

The study indicates that a multitude of place names from the late 3rd millennium suggests complex cultural interactions in ancient Iran.

What is the significance of 'Anshan' in the context of Cyrus the Great's genealogy?add

The Cyrus Cylinder reveals that Cyrus' ancestors were kings of Anshan, indicating a distinct cultural background that contrasts with later Persian identity.

When did the title 'king of Anshan' first appear in historical records?add

The title is first attested in early 2nd millennium documents, indicating a longstanding political significance in the region.

About the author
D.T. Potts
New York University, Faculty Member
Papers
463
Followers
27,363
View all papers from D.T. Pottsarrow_forward

Related papers

The Indo-Iranian Approach to Greater Iran
A. Mani Irannejad

Iran: Journal of the British Institute for Persian Studies, 2023

With an origin in western Eurasia, the Indo-Iranian languages appeared in Greater Iran and beyond in the second millennium and were expressed widely in the first millennium BCE. Considering an early separation of Proto-Iranian from the Proto-Indo-Iranian linguistic core, Eurasian archaeological cultures affiliated with Indo-Iranians are revisited. While the Sintashta and Petrovka cultures, along with the Alakul Andronovo cultural complex, are plausible reflections of the Proto-Indo-Aryans, the situation is more complex for the Proto-Iranians who later shaped the cultures of the Scythians and Iranians of Greater Iran. Tracing the origins of these Proto-Iranians in the Inner Asian Mountain Corridor and Central Asia, their possible expansion into Greater Iran, partly separated from the Proto-Indo-Aryan path, is demonstrated. An Iranian speaking group in Transoxiana, distinct from the Iranians of Greater Iran, is also discussed with the Proto-Iranian affiliated Timber Grave culture of western Eurasia as one of its possible components.

View PDFchevron_right
Chapter II Indo-Iranian relationship in Pre–Aryan and Aryan periods 21. Introduction 2.2 Iranian native people 2.2 Indian native people 2.3 Indo–Iranian relationship in pre-Aryan and Aryan periods
naghme ghasemi
View PDFchevron_right
THE EARLY TRANS-CAUCASIAN CULTURE IN IRAN: PERSPECTIVES AND PROBLEMS
Geoffrey Summers

Most recent synthetic studies of the Early Trans-Caucasian (ETC) Culture have omitted inclusion of evidence from Iran, concentrating instead on the Trans-Caucasus and Eastern Turkey. Recent publication of Godin Tepe level IV and ETC stratigraphy and architecture at Yanik Tepe permit a wider assessment. Brief reports of new work undertaken by Iranian archaeologists have extended the range of ETC settlements to the edge of the Caspian Basin. Despite chronological imprecision arising from absence of 14 C dates, an overview of the Urmia Basin and Western Zagros is attempted. Current evidence suggests that the ETC arrived in the Urmia Basin fully developed and rapidly spread south. This overview addresses local and regional differences in material culture, from building traditions to ceramic styles, against the overwhelming sense of cultural conservatism. A fi nal section is concerned with the end of the ETC and its apparent replacement by the Yayla Culture (Urmia Ware), in the Urmia Basin and portions of Eastern Anatolia.

View PDFchevron_right
Petrie, C.A. (2013), Ancient Iran and Its Neighbours: the state of play, in Petrie (ed.), Ancient Iran and Its Neighbours
Cameron Petrie
View PDFchevron_right
Touraj Daryaee and Robert Rollinger (eds.), Iran and Its Histories. From the Beginnings to the Achaemenid Empire (Proceedings of the First and Second Payravi Lectures on Ancient Iranian History) (Classica et Orientalia 29), Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz 2021.
Robert Rollinger

2021

This volume brings together the contributions of the first and second Payravi conferences on Ancient Iranian History, held at the University of California Irvine (Dr. Samuel M. Jordan Center for Iranian Studies), and organized by the editors of this volume. The first conference took place on March 23 rd , 2018, with the title The Iranian Plateau and its Histories. From the Beginnings to the 1 st Millennium BCE. The second was held on March 11 th-12 th , 2019, entitled The Persian-Achaemenid Empire as a 'World-System': New Approaches and Contexts. In the meantime, the third conference, Iran and the Transformation of Ancient Near Eastern History: The Seleucids (ca. 312-150 BCE), was held on February 24 th-25 th , 2020, while the fourth one dealing with the Arsacids had to be postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We very much hope that it will be possible to convene again in the first or second half of 2022. The idea of the Payravi conferences was born thanks to a generous donation by the Payravi family in memory of the late Ali-Asghar Payravi who had been an avid reader and enthusiast of the world of ancient Iranian. The aim of the conferences and the subsequent proceedings was to present a learned and critical inquiry into the history of the Iranian Plateau from its pre-dynastic period in the 2 nd millennium BCE up to the end of the Sasanian Empire in the 7 th century CE. This undertaking was to be implemented through five conferences and the publication of the respective proceedings, both organised by Touraj Daryaee and Robert Rollinger. We wish to thank the Payravi family for their support in bringing together an international group of scholars from different parts of the world to present, discuss and publish papers about the ancient Iranian World. Our sincere thanks go to a group of people without whom the implementation of the undertaking and its success would not have been possible. First, to Mrs. Parichehr Farhad (Payravi), who accepted our proposal and, along with her sister, Mrs. Parvaneh Payrovi, generously supported our idea. We also wish to thank Mr. Saeid Jalalipour, the Program Manager at the Center for Persian Studies at UC Irvine, for his logistical organization of the first three conferences.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Economic History
  • Near Eastern Archaeology
  • Iranian Archaeology
  • Iranian Studies
  • Ancient Near East
  • Ancient Iranian Religion
  • Achaemenid History
  • Ancient Near Eastern History
  • Achaemenid and Hellenistic Babyl...
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2026 Academia. All rights reserved